Elliott Rodger

[J4MES OX4D 9,778]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-27562917

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8ZEjruo5eI

 

https://www.youtube.com/user/ElliotRodger/videos

 

This is gonna further fuel the gun control debate. Personally I don't think it's wise that someone who is being treated for mental health illnesses to have custody of guns regardless if they are owned legally. They should have been confiscated particularly under the advice of family and after his recent alarming behavior. A tragedy for all parties involved. I don't know what the mental health services are like in the US but here in the UK; they are desperately underfunded and many homegrown murder-suicide incidents still occur with disorders being a proven factor in the reports. 

 

It's a tough subject and lessons will be learned but each person and incident has to be based on its own merit. Taking away his guns still wouldn't have prevented the stabbings and after being assessed by deputies; they were operating in their remit to allow him to remain in the community after no immediate threat was identified up on a recommended visit. This will be scrutinised to buggery no doubt.

 

Elliott Rodger could have easily gone on a knife-wielding rampage alternatively and perhaps done more damage than with the guns in an area so the guns can't be entirely to blame but the bottom line is his risk to the public would be greater enhanced with them. If his family suspected he was a threat in which they did alert police; should they have taken steps for his safety and brought him home and does this fly-by visit by deputies work effictively? They are doing what is asked and although they determined no threat; it was wrong.  I don't believe they were to blame as Rodger could have conned them and I firmly believe they did their work under the correct criteria laid out in such circumstances. 

 

Perhaps incidents like this are completely non-preventable and more needs to be done for people with mental health issues and quicker also particularly if they demonstrate the alarming behaviour Elliott did in the 24 hours before his rampage. I think they need to address gun ownership with people who are at, or pose a future risk i.e the mentally unstable but overall; is this a failure of many parties or just something that could happen to anyone, anywhere? 

 

 

[BoroVC 37]

Whiny, rich kid goes on a killing spree because he's pissed off he can't lose his virginity. What a fucking loser.

[J4MES OX4D 9,778]

Whiny, rich kid goes on a killing spree because he's pissed off he can't lose his virginity. What a fucking loser.

He's probably had everything laid out on a plate for him his whole life and hasn't had to work or put any effort into getting things he wanted. Perhaps a bit of a culture shock when ladies didn't fall head over heals for him and he didn't get what he wanted. 

[Dr Diamond 407]

Whiny, rich kid goes on a killing spree because he's pissed off he can't lose his virginity. What a fucking loser.

Very easy to say this when you do not have all the facts.

The news reports suggest that this kid had mental health issues that may or may not have been properly addressed. I think it is quite clear that he was sick. Nobody chooses to be mentally ill.

To suggest that he killed 6 people because he was " just a whiny rich loser" does nothing but perpetuate the stereotypes and stigma surrounding mental health.

[BoroVC 37]

Very easy to say this when you do not have all the facts.

The news reports suggest that this kid had mental health issues that may or may not have been properly addressed. I think it is quite clear that he was sick. Nobody chooses to be mentally ill.

It's not just suggested, he did have mental health issues. And his parents paid for many counselling sessions too, so its not as if the help wasnt there for him.

Mental disability is not an excuse for this.

I wonder how, despite his mental issues, he was still allowed to own a gun?

[Just Cal 461]

He was a mental fuck who shouldn't have been allowed to own a gun.

We can do the usual debate on this subject but that's the bottom line. If he hadn't have killed those people, he would just be called a mentally challenged person who shouldn't have been allowed to own a gun. He killed people so shall be classed as a mental fuck who shouldn't have been allowed to own a gun.

[Dr Diamond 407]

 its not as if the help wasnt there for him.

 

but you dont know that from a news report. you dont know exactly what his mental health problems were or what treatment he had/was recieiving

 

 

 

Mental disability is not an excuse for this.

So then why is "not guilty by reason of mental defect" an allowed defence in a criminal trial. Again. People do not choose to be mentally ill. It is no more of a choice than being born with black skin, or being born gay.There are certain circumstances where a person is not responsible for their own actions, (some) mental health issues being one of them. 

with regards to gun control : It is far easy to blame a shooting on a "mental" person or a "psycho" , rather than face the fact that Americans gun laws clearly still have some issues.

[J4MES OX4D 9,778]

I think the underlying problem here is the allowance of someone with mental health issues to own a gun. Having such a weapon can increase the risk to themselves and others. These should have been confiscated until he was determined fit post-treatment. 

 

Regardless of the gun issue; he still stabbed 3 people first so perhaps the systematic failure is not just gun control but allowing him in society. Sure he was recently assessed but considering how stretched the services are and how everyone seems to be all treated the same when mentally ill; more detail needs to go into ensuring the well-being of the person and others around them. It'll be interesting to see what his doctors and the officers who visited say in their reports and whether this incident could have been prevented. His mental state could have deteriorated severely in recent days or perhaps he was able to hide his real intentions and mask everything as fine. 

 

Allowing him a gun is very irresponsible under the circumstances for me and this needs to be addressed. 

[BoroVC 37]

but you dont know that from a news report. you dont know exactly what his mental health problems were or what treatment he had/was recieiving

No, I can only go from what I've read about it. I've been reading various reports, articles and discussions on it all day. That's where I've formed my opinion.

So then why is "not guilty by reason of mental defect" an allowed defence in a criminal trial.

Just because that happens doesn't mean everyone agrees with it.

If he hadn't have been killed, what would you have a suggested? Give him a cup of cocoa and a cuddle and say 'don't worry mate, we'll get those mental issues of yours sorted properly, get you laid and integrate you back into society.'?

Again. People do not choose to be mentally ill. It is no more of a choice than being born with black skin, or being born gay.There are certain circumstances where a person is not responsible for their own actions, (some) mental health issues being one of them.

No shit.

It's a fitting end that the only penetration this guy ever knew was the bullet in his head.

[Megan 35]

Very easy to say this when you do not have all the facts.

The news reports suggest that this kid had mental health issues that may or may not have been properly addressed. I think it is quite clear that he was sick. Nobody chooses to be mentally ill.

To suggest that he killed 6 people because he was " just a whiny rich loser" does nothing but perpetuate the stereotypes and stigma surrounding mental health.

 

Suggesting that he killed 6 people because of his (possible) mental illness also perpetuates stereotypes surrounding mental health. People with mental illnesses are more likely to victims of crime, not perpetrators.

 

If you label a killer as "mentally ill" and fail to address any other factors involved, the killer is no longer held responsible for his actions. He is provided with a perfect scapegoat, and it propagates the idea that mentally ill people are dangerous.

 

Also, out of all the articles I read about this, plenty of them were quick to mention mental illness, yet few of them even touched on that this kid felt so entitled to women that he killed people. 

 

 

It's not fair. You girls have never been attracted to me. I don't know why you girls have never been attracted to me, but I will punish you all for it. It's an injustice, a crime, because I don't know what you don't see in me. I'm the perfect guy, and yet you throw yourselves at all these obnoxious men, instead of me, the supreme gentleman.

 

I don't know about you guys, but this is quote doesn't sound unfamiliar to me at all. I hear boys whining about girls not giving them the time of day, even though they're a 'nice guy,' and how girls 'only go for douche bags.' This kind of thinking is rampant, and its dangerous. I mean, just last month a girl got stabbed for turning down a kid to prom.

 

I wonder how many of these incidents need to happen before people realize that something is wrong.

[Dr Diamond 407]

Suggesting that he killed 6 people because of his (possible) mental illness also perpetuates stereotypes surrounding mental health. People with mental illnesses are more likely to victims of crime, not perpetrators.

 

If you label a killer as "mentally ill" and fail to address any other factors involved, the killer is no longer held responsible for his actions. He is provided with a perfect scapegoat, and it propagates the idea that mentally ill people are dangerous.

 

 

.There are certain circumstances where a person is not responsible for their own actions, (some) mental health issues being one of them. 

with regards to gun control : It is far easy to blame a shooting on a "mental" person or a "psycho" , rather than face the fact that Americans gun laws clearly still have some issues.

 

[J4MES OX4D 9,778]

^well said Megan.

 

We of course don't know whether his actions are also that caused of the illness or if he was fully aware of what he was doing. Many unfit to plead/insane murderers are acquitted due to hearing voices or believing that a unknown force was controlling their body. Many murderers/serial killers also get assessed and find there was no underlying mental defect that caused them to carry out their actions. Not all murderers are therefor classed as mentally ill or if their killing was a result of the illness. Many murderers usually have some form of personality disorder or mental disorder but it doesn't make them insane in their actions. 

[Megan 35]

I saw your "some," Diamond, don't worry. 

 

Elliot Rodger is confirmed to have been previously diagnosed with aspergers, which is not linked to violence, and nothing else. (So far, at least - I'm not ruling out that there may have been something else wrong with him). My response was more geared toward everyone that jumped on the fact that he had a mental illness, and are disregarding everything else involved. 

[Docwagon 856]

I don't know what the mental health services are like in the US but here in the UK; they are desperately underfunded and many homegrown murder-suicide incidents still occur with disorders being a proven factor in the reports. 

 

 

They are the same, and it won't change.  Gun control won't change, either.  The gun debate is fueled by emotion and a fantasy world on both sides.  The hard core gun rights people will obstruct any true attempt to get hands out of crazy people's hands with the "what part of shall not be infringed do you not understand" mentality and because they see conspiracy and police state in their own shadow, they'll slipperly slope it to death as "the government will just declare us all crazy" type bullshit.  The hard core anti-gunners will pretend guns will just disappear if more laws are passed and ignore the huge population of gun owners who aren't murderous assholes.

 

A prime example is the irresponsible assholes who leave guns out where children can find them because "if someone breaks into my house, I don't have time to unsecure the gun..." thinking.  They'll claim the statistics about it being more dangerous to have an unsecure firearm in the house are lies, manipulated, include suicides, etc.  They aren't, from my experience.  I'm so sick and fucking tired of seeing children shot because of people leaving their guns out.  You know how many home invasions I've had stopped with a firearm in the last year?  One.  You know how many children I've had shot?  Four, one fatally, two permanently disfigured (missing a finger and a thumb, respectively), and one that will heal up ok.  All 6 and under.  But if you suggest mandatory trigger locks, gun safes, or keeping it in a holster, you are anti-2nd amendment and against safety.  If you're really worried about a home invasion, under the sofa is a stupid fucking place for a gun, on your hip in a holster is the smart play.

 

After Newtown, all we heard was "we don't need gun control, we need better mental health laws, etc."  Go to a gun forum now, and that's forgotten.  No, its all tyranny and blood on the tree of freedom if you try to disarm the suicidal or mentally ill.

[Dattebayo 446]

It's a fitting end that the only penetration this guy ever knew was the bullet in his head.

I would be settled with Big Manny from cell block C, but this crazy son of a b*tch got what he deserved.

[Playertd 177]

Wow that is horrible.....glad that psycho excuse for a human was shot dead though, people like that do not deserve to live.

[spectre 633]

Why are eye witnesses saying there were two people in the BMW but the Police won't confirm or deny this?  Look it up.

 

Also, if he allegedly killed 3 of the 7 people with a knife, why aren't they crying about banning knives?

[Palle 491]

 

 

Also, if he allegedly killed 3 of the 7 people with a knife, why aren't they crying about banning knives?

 

Maybe they would if it was a high capacity combat assault magazine knife... But then everyone knows that guns are insidious, evil tools that possess people and turn them into murderers!

 

 

[J4MES OX4D 9,778]

I see the conspiracy theorists have jumped on the bandwagon around the net bang on time with some very flamboyant claims whilst hiding behind their keyboard stirring up theories despite not having concrete knowledge of the events. It only takes one speculative comment and suddenly everything gets twisted and misconstrued as it multiplies and spirals into more outlandish tales. Seems to be the same people who said the Boston bombing was a performance of a smoke grenades, fake blood and a cast of paraplegic actors.

 

Whilst there is a lot of bullshit in the world and things we don't know and are within our rights to be suspicious about; I find some of these remarks online extremely disrespectful and offensive. Even the father who spoke bravely after hearing his son got gunned down was branded an actor as his son was taken into hiding.  Can't people just accept this happened the way it did and there is no ulterior motive behind the tragedy? I don't even want to mention the tragic events of Sandy Hook and what was spoken about that.  

 

It may be early days in the investigation but this wasn't some upper echelon farce to manipulate and engineer laws. It's a common tragedy and this happen in this day and age around the world every day. 

[Palle 491]

I'm not saying this was a conspiracy, I believe what happened. That was just a joke.

[J4MES OX4D 9,778]

I'm not saying this was a conspiracy, I believe what happened. That was just a joke.

Oh i know that - I was referring to the Alex Jones fanatics and co

[Docwagon 856]

 Can't people just accept this happened the way it did and there is no ulterior motive behind the tragedy? 

Of course not.  That doesn't get you any attention, doesn't get you any web traffic, etc.

 

Plus, its just more fun for them, and maybe a touch comforting.  At least *someone* is in control of everything that happens, even if that something is bad.

 

Same people who have two years of canned tomatoes but no short term disability insurance or emergency savings fund.  Real likely setbacks are scary and no fun to prepare against.

[Drifter 851]

I won't get too deep into the gun control debate, but I will say this. Stricter gun laws do nothing to prevent crimes and anyone that thinks they will are just simply kidding themselves. Murder is a crime but that doesn't stop people from committing it does it.

 

People can, and will get weapons to commit crimes no matter what the laws are, be it gun, knife, IED, baseball bat, chemicals you name it, there's many ways to commit heinous and senseless acts towards your fellow man. Legally or illegally  owning a gun is honestly a null point in cases of crimes. For those that are mentally ill or not mentally ill, if they can not get a gun legally then they will simply get one illegally (a lot easier than you would think in certain areas trust me) or they will just use some other means of mass murdering people such as just running them down in his car.

 

Honestly there is too much garbage after an incident like this happens where both sides of the debate as well as the Government waste so much effort and time talking and fighting about gun control when they should be addressing the real underlying problems. Which is proper treatment for mentally ill persons, and stricter punishments for criminals rather than slapping people on the wrist and letting them back out into the world (not the case here but is the case in other incidents).

 

The other thing that obviously the Gov has no control over, but which I believe is another main reason for senseless murders ...and that is the deterioration of morals/values and improper upbringing over the past two decades. There's been more senseless murders like this over the past 20 yrs than there ever was in the 50 yrs before that, there's a reason for that and it's the way society is these days.

 

Anyway that's all I'll say about this because this sort of discussion can get pretty emotionally fueled and I don't like to get too deep into them, but the above is my .02 for what it's worth.

[Docwagon 856]

I won't get too deep into the gun control debate, but I will say this. Stricter gun laws do nothing to prevent crimes and anyone that thinks they will are just simply kidding themselves. Murder is a crime but that doesn't stop people from committing it does it.

 

 

Yet murder is illegal so that we can sequester that person away and keep them from doing it again, or be able to arrest them for attempt or conspiracy to commit and prevent a life lost.

 

Stricter gun laws can prevent crime, if done appropriately.  Banning cosmetic features or wholesale prohibition is not doing it appropriately.  Allowing the mental ill to be disarmed does.  Indiana has the "Jake Laird law" because a mentally unstable person had their guns confiscated, petitioned the court and got them back, and then murdered his mother and shot up the neighborhood, killing one cop and wounding several others.  Had the law allowed his crazy ass to be held in a mental institution or prohibited him from getting his guns back, the tragedy could likely have been avoided.

 

http://www.odmp.org/officer/17421-officer-timothy-jacob-jake-laird

 

Since I work in Homicide & Robbery, I get a stat sheet on every homicide, murder or otherwise, in our county.  Very few murderers don't have weapons priors along with multiple prior felony and drug arrests (as do a majority of victims, for that matter).  Stricter enforcement for weapons offenses for felons would prevent crimes, as those assholes would be in jail instead of back out carrying guns and slinging dope again.

[Sennex 1,903]

I am new to this story, as I avoided all things "news" this weekend.

 

That being said, I am reading all this now and spotted one thing that always sets my blood to boiling.

 

Its being reported that this dude had Asperger's spectrum Autism.

 

First off:

 

Aspergers as an Official diagnosis was removed by the American Psychiatric Association back in 2012, as it was a shitty diagnosis, and we have learned more about Autism since then. My son was originally labelled as Aspergers Spectrum, but was changed to Regressive Autism when Aspergers went away.

 

Autistic's can be incredibly violent. This is contrary to popular belief, and the percentage is very small, but is is possible, I have seen it and experienced it first hand. Typically this violence happens only in severe cases of autism, during puberty, and when the normal "Tool box" of responses doesn't work. The Child will just lash out. Again this is not frequent, and I would venture to guess that the actual number is less than 1%.

 

(Anyone wanting to know more, let me know, while not an expert, I will share my experience and library on Autism as much as I can)

 

Second off:

 

Why the fuck are we again talking about gun control and not talking about how the mental health services in this country have been in a steady nose dive since the 1960's?

 

Why aren't we talking about how people with mental health issues are typically ostracized and ridiculed in this country?

 

Mental health funding and treatment are as bad, if not worse than VA benefits, treatment, and funding.

 

//this isn't directed at anyone here, just in general by what I am seeing in the news

//Also, wasn't there a second shooter/ stabber on the grassy knoll?